I don't think the issue is necessarily the tool, but rather the execution. I think everybody can agree that improving efficiency is a good thing, and tools to track/improve it are a net benefit, but the way they approached it was abhorrent.
But seriously, who approved posting that (before it was deleted)?
> I think everybody can agree that improving efficiency is a good thing
At what point does demanding top efficiency from a human every minute of every work shift cross the line into abuse? I would argue this tool is miles over that that line.
Workplaces should server the workers too, not just the capital interests of the owners.
The case, Dodge v. Ford Motor Company, was about minority shareholders' ability to challenge the authority of the board of directors to make business decisions that were alleged to be serving interests other than maximizing the value of plaintiffs' shares.
AI iS gOInG tO mAkE tHe wOrLD a BeTtEr PlAcE. Mhm, I'm sure. These people don't see those that they believe are underneath them as human beings. They are cattle to have their blood drained for profit. Privacy? Ethics? Integrity? Humanity?... Or money?
If they tweaked it to show the monthly output of this guy was great but he was just having one bad day and their response was more compassionate then it wouldn't have been so dystopian looking.
Instead it looks like the next abstract evolution of a whip.
>I think everybody can agree that improving efficiency is a good thing, and tools to track/improve it are a net benefit
Well in a void, yes, but in reality, no: You pay prices to acquire things. Occasionally we increase efficiency with no downsides aside from investment cost or complexity, but much more commonly at least part of the price paid is increased pressure on those at the bottom (lower wages, unemployment, time, stress, dignity, etc etc).
> Well in a void, yes, but in reality, no: You pay prices to acquire things.
It's worse than this, the product designers are marketing to the manufacturers that place the least possible value on the things that allow it to exist - workers and society.
At Optifye, I am using my expertise in computer vision to solve a manufacturing company owner's biggest problem: low labor productivity!
Defining workers as the "owner's biggest problem" sounds a lot like signaling to they type of owner who never sees the backs they stepped on to get where they are.
I’m not sure everybody can agree that improving efficiency is necessarily a good thing at all points on the curve, nor even that simple output metrics can fully capture it. Laundry workers at Disney memorably referred to the “efficiency” leaderboard management forced on them—to improve “efficiency” through public humiliation—as the “electronic whip.”
The thing that got me (random person with no factory experience), their own website and the HN Startup page sounds fantastic. AI + cameras to identify bottlenecks is a huge gain. I never would've realized it was actually for monitoring the _workers'_ outputs.
Tools that are too efficient in improving efficiency make it very easy to bring about inhumane environments. I have found this to be a pretty generally applicable line of reasoning.
But seriously, who approved posting that (before it was deleted)?